Heybrook TT2 vs Linn LP12 (A/B comparison... almost)

[bubba45]

Opinions and/or questions would be most appreciated.
I have owned an LP12 for a little under a year now. It has a Cetech subchasis, Hercules/MOSE power supply and an Origin Live fully modded RB300 with AT440Mla cartridge.
It took an age to set up properly as the OL RB300 causes untold problems with its cable but set up it is and unlike ordinary RB300`s these do play on LP12`s especially with a Cetech subchasis.
It sounds fantastic - depth & breadth of sound staging superb; high, mid and bass tones are wonderful and balanced, timing and seperation excellent, etc etc. (bearing in mind I came from a fairly mediocre starting point.)
I have recently finished restoring a MK1 TT2 and fitted an unmodded RB300 with AT110e and run it through the same system. A lovely piece of turntable kit in itself.
Today out of interest I have run a side-by-side A/B comparison and found that there is literally a hairs breadth of difference between the 2. The TT2 set up has a slightly `boomier` bass, a little less seperation and the timing is not quite so precise.
However I know from running A/B comparisons of both the carts and arms that these differences are predominantly down to these 2 factors and that if I swap the OL RB300 & AT440MLa over to the TT2 I`m sure most of the differences would disappear.
My questions are:
Has anyone else ever run an A/B comparison of these 2?
Or even owned them in the past and found the same as me?
Does anyone with a good knowledge of these 2 have an opinion about these 2 TT`s, eg ex-dealers, people used to set up and servicing of both?
Is there something glaringly obvious or subtle I`m missing with either the LP12 or the Heybrook TT2?
Is this a case of the `emperors new clothes` and actually the LP12 with or without all it`s mods is simply not as wonderful as it`s reputation deserves?
By the way I have also posted this in VE so I can hopefully get broad opinion base.
Cheers in advance.

[Beechwoods]

Hi Bubba interesting first post, welcome to the forum. Stop by the 'Welcome' area to say hello and a bit about you when you get the chance. What's your proper name? Assuming it's not 'Bubba' - my apologies if it is!

[DSJR]

Hi Bubba,

I have set both up with identical arms and done many comparisons.

The mk1 TT2 did have a "boom" problem, not at all like the bloat of the eighties LP12, but just as harmful to correct reproduction of vinyl LP's. The mk2 version of the TT2 had an aluminium casting for the sub-chassis and this was very much better and a serious contender in the mid-price turntable arena, along with the Systemdek IIx/900, AR Legend (as called in the UK), Manticor Mantra and LPT. Heybrook ran into difficulties I think just after this and the Mantra basically took over as a bridge between Rega's and the LP12.

I was always able to get a good sound out of an LP12/RB300 combination and the cartridge used plays a very important part in this I've found (same as with using an SME V on an LP12 - which could be done with care. The 440MLa should be a great match for these turntables IMO, without spending more than twice as much on a OC9 or AT33PTG for instance. Just don't be tempted by the beefier sounding Dynavectors or, heaven forbid, a Grado or Goldring, which probably won't be as good as what you're using.

[pure sound]

When you look at the construction of the two decks, there's no real reason why an LP12 should be better. I think the TT2 subchassis (I think you have the cast ali version) is a good deal better than the pressed metal type in the LP12 and I suspect that the all brass bearing housing is also possibly preferable to the nylon lined LP12 bearing (provided the oil is chosen carefully). The plinth construction is also better conceived imho on the TT2.

I was looking today on some 80's HFC scans on Pink Fish where the TT2 and LP12 of the time were tested. The TT2 was £265 at the time while the LP12 was £470. I suspect the enhanced expectation due to price would have been the answer back in the 80's although materially the TT2 is much better value.

[DSJR]

I agree, looking back. The AR deck was amazingly good as well, once the iffy bearing of the first ones was sorted out.

Trouble was, these decks sounded a bit light-weight compared with the LP12 and if you've read RD's views of the market at that time, we were so blinkered and ignorant of what was right (relatively speaking). It took Richard Black's comparison of some of these decks compared to master tape to start to bring some sense back into things (he loved the PT Anniversary as I recall).

As a separate issue, it wasn't until the mid eighties that myself and colleagues in the other shop started getting technics and similar direct-drives in for cartridge/stylus changes and it came as a surprise that many of them, set up on proper supports, actually sounded really good (this was before the SL1200 mk2 came along I think).

I think that unless you were there in the scene at the time, just how much Linn ruled the UK turntable market.

[bubba45]

Cheers for your views gents.
I gave them a very good A/B comparison today and I must say that strangely enough I`m leaning towards the TT2.
It may well be because I put so much effort (for a novice) into restoring it rather than the LP12 which I essntially bought as a kit and simply assembled.
The sound on the TT2 is very appealing to me and to be honest I think that a lot of the `boom` can be tempered when I switch in the OL RB300 & 440MLa from the LP12. They both bring in a great deal of clarity and definition that should give more focus to the bass on the TT2.
Hi Guy how are you? I was going to PM some photos and thanks for the plinth when I have finished painting up the armboard I made. The subchasis is the box steel welded cross shape with the MDF fill and you are right it makes for a hugely more substantial subchasis than the LP12. Did the cast aluminium type make any difference on a TT2?
The tolerances of the inner platter spindle and bearing housing are amazingly precise and it runs so smooth. Altogether the TT2 is a lovely, well engineered turntable and I have been well impressed so far.
My leaning at the moment is to actually sell the LP12, keep the TT2 and use the money for some other hifi gear, though other than a decent TT shelf and a good DAB tuner I`m fairly happy with what I have.
I have never heard any of the AR tables nor a Manticore or LPT. Are they all much of a muchness or are there noticeable differences?
Jason

[Peter Stockwell]

I had a TT2, but 3000 miles in theback of my car, without tightening the chassis lock bolt did it in, it was never the same afterwards. I sold it for about $180 in 1988/1989.

[DSJR]

IMO, the cast sub-chassis improved the TT2 out of all recognition and this refinement took it to another level. Sadly, this was around the time that turntable sales took a nosedive and Heybrook had also lost the momentum they had in the early eighties. Perhaps there's a light-weight fill that can go in the tubular sub-chassis to damp it down?

I believe that later ones had an external power supply and the main bearing and platter system were always beautifully done.

[bubba45]

Well I swapped the OL modded RB300 / AT440MLa into the Heybrook and if there`s a difference it`s minor and the bass boom is massively limited with the bass as a whole a helluva lot more defined.
The TT2 is a little warmer than the LP12 which I like and I can get a decent price for the LP12 so it`s all good.
The TT2 is all painted and the veneer oiled and to me the deck looks and sounds great so when I get chance at the weekend I`ll take and post some snaps of it and the Ariston RD40 I restored at the turn of the year. The RD40 is on my 2nd system and at some point I will get round to rewiring the tonearm it just to see how good the sound can get on these Jelco arms.
As both the TT2 and the RD40 have taken many long hours to complete I guess you could say they are my pride and joy.....
In the photos you`ll see that the armboard for the TT2 is a little too small but for a 1st attempt it ain`t bad but even so I will undoubtedly make another.

Not sure what my next restoration should be? Any suggestions welcome.
Jason

[DSJR]

Try dressing the RB300 cables this way on an LP12 (like we used to do the Grace 707)

Use a cable tie to tie the cable to the arm pillar, giving it some height (essential with a 250). Pre- squeeze the P clip (use a new one each time, they're cheap enough from RS components) in a small bench-vice to the right size so it tightly grips the cable without crushing one edge. I used match-sticks to aid the RB250 wires, not elegant, but it worked for me).

More bass than an LP12 is a very risky thing (ok, yours has the cetech). The LP12 isn't known as "the fruitbox" for nothing. As I said previously, the juicy, organic bass from a standard LP12 is totally WRONG, despite how tuneful and involving it is. The bass in recordings (and from better turntables) is dryer and firmer.

Me? I'd sell both turntables, keep the OL arm if it's finished to a good standard (not all are apparently, so I've been told by one who should know) and put it on a NAS Spacedeck (or a Techie, although I feel in my bones that a Rega sibling isn't the best choice for one of these). You'll get tunes, rhythm and a clarity you never thought LP's could give - and that's only the beginning!!!!!!!!!